Good Afternoon Respected Planners, I am working on EPC Project guided by FIDIC form of contract Unlike NEC in FIDIC programmes cannot be rejected by client but there is a mechanism for acknowledging the programme on receipt from contractor every month. This mechanism involves writing back to contractors upon review of the monthly schedule with feedback on where we noticed there is programme irregularity
Contractor has just notified of a claim relating to Covid 19 with a EOT for additional 60 days from the key milestone date. One of the reasons giving by the contractor is that a particular activity which drives the critical path was originally planned for 7 days a week, however with restriction on the number of personnel onsite, the contractor affirm that this particular activity can only be achieved on a 5days working
I have looked through the activity in question and what struck me was that the baseline and the subsequent programme before the delay event did have a 5 days working calendar.
Without going into much effort, can I advise the client to reject the EOT automatically as it does not align with the claim ?
Appreciate any useful advise please.
if the schedule was always based on 5 day work week then saying the plan was work 7 days a week.
How many days a weeks was he working prior to covid19 ? This should be your basis.
I do beleive that a shortage of manpower could and probally did exist but I believe that the EOT should be framed in different manner.
Was there ever and original manpower projection ? IF so how does that compaire to the actual manpower on site.
The 5 vs 7 working days does not appear to be a correct assumption of the original plan.